Login

Perhaps the biggest news to come out of Rep. Thom Tillis’ press conference this morning about upcoming voter photo ID legislation is that the Speaker and his colleagues will be undertaking a “deliberate, responsible and interactive approach” to drafting such laws.

“We will not be rushed,” said his colleague Rep. David Lewis.

Voter fraud must be one serious problem here, given the careful consideration they foresee as necessary — bigger, say, then slashing unemployment benefits or slamming the door on Medicaid expansion, both of which the Republican majority in the General Assembly accomplished before the public could blink twice.

They’ll need that time to examine the root causes of voter fraud in North Carolina and the skyrocketing number of voter fraud cases here: that would be all of 22 (below) since 2000, according to the investigative news site News 21.

Of course, they’ll need more time and hundreds of thousands of state dollars later, too, after this deliberate and thorough vetting, to defend their photo ID laws in court. But given the gravity of the problem here, perhaps that ‘s a price worth paying.

12 Comments

Gene Bridges

March 5, 2013 at 3:34 pm

And let’s not forget. We’re told that we need this because of the super secret kind of Voter fraud you need a special decoder ring from Little Orphan Annie to detect. Seriously, it has to be that, not the sort that is actually detectable. Think about it. The argument against Voter ID boils down to this: Our existing laws and procedures work. Ergo, why add new laws and procedures? There’s nothing, by the way, especially creative about that. It’s a very conservative few of the law, borrowed from their own ideological playbook no less. On that view, every instance of Voter ID we catch is evidence *against* Voter ID,*NOT* for Voter ID. Put another way, the rationale behind Voter ID is a viciously circular logical trap. They say Voter fraud of the sort Voter ID is supposed to prevent is a problem. Therefore, it must be occurring, but if you know about it then that means it’s detectable. If it has been detected, then that proves our existing laws work. So, it must be the super secret kind they have in mind, but if its so super secret, then how do they know it’s going on? The argument for Voter ID is irrational and illogical on its face.

George Greene

March 5, 2013 at 3:54 pm

Let us not forget that at least one BLACK Democratic Senator (Ben Clark from Hoke&Cumberland) is on record as saying he would be all right with a voter ID bill that allowed people failing the ID check to cast provisional ballots. This is disturbing to put it charitably. He also voted for the unemployment-gutting bill. It is one thing to have a handful of miscreant turncoats. It is ENTIRELY ANOTHER for one of them to be representing a poor black district. Get your arguments READY.

Angel

March 5, 2013 at 4:01 pm

It makes me almost physically ill that we have to pretend they’re doing this for any reason other than disenfranchisement. The kabuki is ridiculous, especially that , even by their own metric, there’s no “there” there.

Jack

March 5, 2013 at 4:02 pm

Gerrymandering the vote via government issued ID.

jill b

March 5, 2013 at 4:19 pm

I am just wondering, looking over the vast number of voter fraud cases that are listed above, how having a license would stop them. Unless that license says you are a registered voter, the same people can vote twice, vote without being able to vote, or any of the other infractions. I say lets do what they do in the middle east, put your finger in indelible ink to show you voted, and leave it at that.

Frances Jenkins

March 5, 2013 at 6:37 pm

The Obama campaign paid an organization $25,000.00 to register 11,000 voters on line in NC. Proper forms were never mailed to the SBOE. members of the SBOE never knew even Larry Leake. If thses votes were removed would Rouzer win?

Election fraud at its highest and you do not have the guts or courage to investigate. Lots of fraud would be 11,000 unproven voters.

Frances Jenkins

March 5, 2013 at 10:24 pm

David,
This straight from the N/O, YESTERDAY! We have 11,000 people who were registered on line by the Obama campaign, a company paid $25,000.00 to do the registrations and the NC SBOE does not have a clue if the voters are real. Go figure!

Doug Gibson

March 6, 2013 at 9:37 am

What Frances is talking about is an online system whereby eligible voters filled out a North Carolina voter registration form and signed the forms online. These signed forms were then sent to county boards of elections. She omits the following:

1) The Obama campaign paid the company $25,000, but it’s not clear they did so to have them create the system.
2) The registrations complied with state law in terms of information required, including address and driver’s license number.
3) If 11,000 voters had filled out voter registration forms on their own and sent them in via U.S. Mail, the SBOE would be equally clueless about whether or not the voters were “real.”
4) The executive director of the North Carolina Republican Party asked about the system in September 2012, and declared himself satisfied with the information he received at the time.
5) Anyone who showed up at the polls having registered via this system would have had to show an ID, as they were first-time voters.
6) There is absolutely no evidence that anyone used this system to actually cast an illegal vote.

Jack

How does the NC SBOE know any of us who are registered voters are real?

How does the NC SBOE know you’re real? Is it because you say so or perhaps you’ve shown NC SBOE your state ID or your birth certificate in hope that you would be seen as real?

In all of this I’ve not heard anyone say that the NC SBOE should be sought out to know what is really happening concerning voter fraud. It is all about stopping people from voting. The conservatives don’t want people voting – the fewer the better as far as they’re concerned.

david esmay

March 6, 2013 at 11:32 am

Frances is not real, he/she is a troll blathering Faux News talking points and drivel dredged from Civitas and John Locke.